tv Charlie Rose Bloomberg August 11, 2016 10:00pm-11:01pm EDT
♪ >> from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." charlie: we continue this evening with a look at the presidential election. republican nominee donald trump stirred controversy with his suggestions that gun rights advocates take matters into their own hands against hillary clinton. mr. trump: hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the second amendment. by the way, and if she gets to
pick if she gets to pick her , judges, nothing you can do, folks. although the second amendment people, maybe there is, i don't know. but i was so you what.
that will be a horrible day. if if hillary gets to put her , judges, right now we are tied. if you don't do
what is the right thing you're not going to , have a second amendment or you are not going to have much of it left. and you are not going to protect yourselves, which you need. which you need. you know when the bad guys burst , into your house, they are not looking about second amendments. do i have the right to do this? charlie: trump insisted that comment was not intended to advocate violence against clinton. the republican nominee has also suffered a steep drop in support from women. launched an has official outreach effort to build a coalition of republicans and independents supporting hillary clinton's candidacy. joining me now, karen tumulty of the washington post and mark halperin of bloomberg.
karen what did donald trump mean , when he said second amendment advocates on to use their power? karen: we know what he said he meant. but i think that the explanation , that sort of strikes me as probably the most closest to the market here was one that paul ryan gave today where he said, it was just a joke that went bad. so, you know but now they are , trying to say, no they, they were trying to marshall a coalition of, you know devoted , supporters of the second amendment. judging by the sort of tone of voice and the reaction of the audience, i think again that explanation doesn't make a lot of sense. charlie: mark? mark: it is uncomfortable to go to one of the campaigns and say, we don't believe what you are telling us. we don't believe your explanation. what i have been saying even if , you want to credit their
explanation, donald trump actually meant that after this they could use this power or before at the ballot box or the lobby, he wants to -- he has to understand and his campaign has to understand a lot of people are really troubled by what he said. they took it to mean advocating violence against a president clinton. and i think it donald trump once to convince people he is reasonable, that he is compassionate, that he is gracious, that he is sensitive, he thinks he needs to convince people of those things to win, he has missed another opportunity to do that. charlie: it is a presidential quality to be able to censor yourself and make sure what you are saying is not misunderstood. mark: yeah, and if you are misunderstood, on a topic so serious, so serious united states secret service is taking it seriously you have to be , reflective, and you have to say i don't like the way the , press has taken what i said wrong, but obviously, no one should make any joke about threatening the life of the united states president or would be president. and the point of the
distraction, of you know 90 days , to go, wasting days on something that has no benefit to him, is just another question of, does he have an understanding of the flow of news? a guy who is given credit several months ago of being a master of the flow of news. now seems to not understand, you can't waste days on things that do not drive the message you want to be talking about. charlie: supporters believe they have to get their message out. tryinge time they spend to explain what they meant in a comment -- mark: it is a losing way to operate. i don't think donald trump has problems with strong second amendment advocates. he doesn't have to spend time firing them up. the nra is the only group that has spent it -- major advertising money on his behalf. his chances of winning depend on part in reaching married female voters in battleground states. i think those voters would like to see less of the combative,
ungracious, somewhat tone deaf side of donald trump. charlie: who do you think they want to see? what does donald trump have to do, karen to broaden his appeal , beyond his core constituency? karen: certainly there is a desire on the part of the country for change. the number in the polls, whether the country is on the right track or the wrong track has been in negative territory since at least the financial collapse of 2008. and i think he really needs to speak to the anxieties and the thirst for change of a lot of people this country. the problem with comments like the ones, the one he made yesterday is, number one, the he steps on his own -- the word pivot is becoming a cliche in this campaign, but it comes right after he gave an economic speech that was supposed to kind of launch the new substantive donald trump. the second problem is, that it comes in the context of a lot of things he and his supporters have been saying about hillary
clinton. the chants of, lock her up. the sort of older t-shirts that the -- vulgar t-shirts that people wear to his rallies, that sort of thing. i think whatever side of the ballot of this you are on, at loses its, this usefulness in reaching out to people who might be genuinely undecided which way to go. charlie: you believe more republicans will come out and a, simply say they cannot support him then perhaps say , they are going to support hillary clinton, in which case some who have endorsed will withdraw their endorsement? does that have momentum? karen: i think that is underway , and is underway right now because the party is afraid of what is going to happen to the rest of its candidates going down the ballot. they are, you know, standing in a position where they could lose control of the senate.
people are even talking about even the possibility of losing control of the house. where they have enjoyed their strongest majority since before the great depression. this would have been unthinkable some months back. there is some question about whether donald trump is not only going to go down in flames himself but to take a significant portion of the party with him. charlie: mark? mark: until elected officials see it is in their own interests to break from trump, they will not in large numbers. the prominent ones are mostly retiring or not on the ballot this year or not from states or districts where trump is not as popular. charlie: that explain susan collins. mark: she is so popular in maine, she can do whatever she wants. she is not up for reelection. george bush a texas official, , jeb bush's son said people should vote for trump. i am for trump. i think there is no clear withle for the people
political aspirations in red states or read congressional districts will continue to be loyal to trump until and unless his numbers with republicans really fall. charlie: is there anything to this argument that somehow this is becoming a moral choice? you know, and you will be judged as to where you stood on donald trump? ark: that is a narrative that lot of democrats are pushing and a lot of reporters talk about. it is a narrative for a lot of spouses and children of republican officeholders. for sure. it is not something that i think that is existing in large numbers. remember where we are now. we are in august. members of congress and most republican politicians are not talking to each other. the enough talking much to their pollsters or advisors. they are off on vacation or doing things that don't have them in that hothouse atmosphere of capitol hill. there are debates coming up. i think the combination of the
, lack of chatter around them and the fact that trump, they feel, could turn things around in the debates means they are not talking about this in moral terms. they are thinking about it in cold political terms. after the first debate if trump has not done well, if poll numbers are the same i think , they will remember, for some of them and the people close to him, there is a moral dimension. that could kick in and be extremely dangerous to the trump campaign. karen: one person who embraced that narrative was ted cruz. he stood up at the republican convention on that stage and said vote your conscience. vote your conscience. that really did not go over well , either with the republicans in the room or i think with the party at large. charlie: yeah, but most people suggest he did it for the reason we are talking about. that if trump came crashing down, he would have been on the right side of history. mark: and he still may be. charlie: and he still may be. and so therefore put him on the position to pick up the pieces. mark: that is a different kind of self interest. he is not on the ballot this year. he is looking to the short-term future to try to be the heir to
whatever the party is after trump loses. he felt a personal rebuke, a sting from what trump comported himself. that allowed him sort of the anger to do it but also gave him a talking point he can use for those who might be angry at him for what he did. charlie: so the polls the , national polls show about a 10 point lead. mark: bloomberg politics has a poll out today that shows six point lead in a two-way race. four points in a four-way race. it is closer than some polls have it. we are also later than out of the field, so it is possible if that trend continues it is , possible some of hillary clinton's lead to out of her convention settle down a little bit. and you have seen some state polls in key states like ohio, florida, nevada where trump is
much closer in those states that he is in the national election. charlie: how do you explain that? are they not predominately republican states? mark: those polls are later, again, further from the convention. in a national poll, one in every seven people in the poll is from california, a very good clinton state. it is possible, these out of -- these battleground states are going to be closer than the national race. and remember trump has not spent , any money on television advertising. if you are the trump campaign, which has gone through a bad time in terms of news coverage, has not in on television with ads, being this close in some battleground states is a big deal. that being said, the continue to polls be so bad for trump they are , talking about another path. charlie: how big do we think the trump movement is today? continue to be so bad forkaren: all the move key states, ohio, pennsylvania, does appear to be doing against him now.
one thing i thought was interesting about the ohio polls that came out in the last few days from the wall street journal, with was where both the senate race and the presidential race were tied a month ago. now you have clinton opening up a five point lead. so is senator rob portman, a republican. and one thing that is really interesting about that, portman is not only distancing himself from the right national -- from the republican ticket, he is actually sending volunteers to campaign for him at clinton rallies. so you are seeing, even if people are not coming out and renouncing donald trump, they are definitely distancing themselves. charlie: are you the guy who first told me that politics makes strange bedfellows? mark: he came up before i was born, but it is the case. it is the case that these senate incumbents, even mark kirk in illinois, pat toomey in
pennsylvania, were thought to be dead and certainly dead if the republican ticket at the top was weak. senate races make their own wind and weather. they are incumbent, they get connection to boaters -- voters. i still think you could see hillary clinton doing potentially very well but not taking the senate for the democrats because these incumbents get the problem. they get the challenge they face. charlie: has trump demonstrated that he can dramatically reduce the financial advantage hillary clinton has? mark: he had a one month of good grassroots funding primarily on the internet, which we thought he would do. did not show the potential until last month. charlie: sanders like. mark: just beginning to understand how to pride that pump. let's see with this month's numbers are like. i don't think he will catch her overall but he will have enough to be competitive. again, the fundraising matters , but in the presidential campaign the earned media , matters so much more.
the news coverage. yes, the fundraising is important. but he really needs to be winning you cycles much more than raising -- news cycles much more than raising $10 million here. charlie: can one argue, or have the impression that donald trump is in increasing number of cases listening to his advisors, because of the way he endorsed paul ryan and senator mccain? mr. trump: -- karen: you know, he sort of operates on a moment by moment impulsive kind of way. is concern that i have heard he doesn't have senior enough people around him on the plane who can, as he does these kind of, you know, in the moment, got feeling -- gut feeling somebody to talk him out , of them then. they can lay all the plans they
want to. he has a tendency to put ied's in his way. charlie: take his temperature before he sees a microphone. mark: or tie up his hands for twitter access. charlie: twitter. mark: child block. charlie: who is the most effective person you know to say no to donald trump? you cannot do this. mark: i would think his kids, his son-in-law, and paul manafort. they of the best chance to crack it. as karen said, with all of them around, he is still living his life in his preferred mode. going home when he wants to go home having the kinds of events , that he wants to have. charlie: coming home at night to the trump tower. mark: rather than sleeping in a motel in iowa. he is still not on the plane spending the kind of time doing , policy prep. i will tell you, on the trajectory we are on the , mismatch in terms of quantity
and quality of debate prep before the first debate will be unprecedented. she and her team are organizing this. i believe she will be the most organized and prepared candidate in terms of hours spent in the history of the debates. i believe he will probably be, as hard as this will be given that senator mccain barely prepared, the least normally prepared going into the event. charlie: thank you to have you both. we will be right back. ♪
♪ charlie: the crisis in aleppo deepened this week. fighting intensified between the assad regime and rebel forces. as they try to break the government siege on the city. trappedn residents are by the violence without access to running water and other things. high temperatures are raising further humanitarian concerns. the u.n. called for a cease-fire on tuesday. close to 470,000 people died since the conflict in syria began. joining me from london is clarissa ward. she is a foreign correspondent for cnn. she testified before the united nations here in new york. >> the ones who have decided to stay, year in and year out, who've braved the relentless bombardment most of them do not , plan on leaving. they made a decision along time -- a long time ago they would rather die in dignity in their homes than leave.
and they have watched what has happened in other places in syria. how this movie ends. and they know bomb them, start them out until they finally leave. we have seen it again and again. they know what happens to the people who leave their homes. most of them never see their homes again. many of them are loaded onto buses and never see the light of day again. charlie: i am pleased to have my great friend, former cbs colleague now at cnn, super correspondent back on this , program. welcome. clarissa: thank you. thank you for having me. it is always a pleasure. charlie: tell me more about, what was the u.n. testimony about? how did it come to be, and more of what happened before we begin to dissect what is happening in aleppo. clarissa: this is a formal u.n. session. session.wn as an aria
essentially i was invited by the u.s. mission to the u.n. to testify alongside two incredibly brave syrian american doctors who work with the syrian american on -- syrian american medical society. also, the u.n. ambassador, samantha power. the u.n. ambassador samantha power spoke, followed by the two doctors, then i spoke and then , several of the other security council members spoke. and then the floor was opened up for comments. essentially, the idea behind holding this session was to talk about the humanitarian crisis in aleppo, to get a refresher of what is happening on the ground, and to perhaps try to take up some new ideas about how on earth to deal with this disaster. it came of course the day before yesterday's session that the u.n. security council held on this issue of aleppo and what to do about this horrific humanitarian crisis. charlie: what is the situation today and why is it different than other places under siege?
clarissa: the situation is dire. and you know, one of the things i mentioned in my speech is i in 2012.t to aleppo i thought to myself, this is what it is like. life cannot get worse. relentless artillery day in and day out. the lack of power. the planes that would start at 5:00 buzzing overhead and you , would do not know where they are going to drop their payload. you have this pit in your stomach, waiting to see where that bomb is going to fall. and then i went back to aleppo just a few months ago, and i found indeed the situation had gotten worse. there is only one road going in held rebeleastern held aleppo. , you have to fly down it at top speed because it is flanked i enemy positions on either side. there are berms of earth to try to protect the way. of course, it felt like such a feeble defense mechanism. when you look at the aerial
power that the regime has, and of course, with the backing of the russians as well. today, the situation in aleppo is even worse than that. for the better part of a month, you had a full siege. it does appear rebels over the weekend managed to break through that siege, but the fighting is so intense, there is very little humanitarian aid being brought in and out out of that small area they have managed to lift the siege. you are looking at a situation in eastern aleppo specifically where as many as 300,000 people are trapped with limited food, . as you heard from the u.n. now there has been damage to the , water infrastructure, electricity, very little drinking water. almost no electricity. no diesel which of course is needed to power generators. many of the hospitals have been hit. and because the rebels have made
some progress in breaking this siege, you are now seeing the full force of the russian energy and air power being brought to retaliation. from people i have spoken to, the situation is quite unbearable right now. charlie: you are talking about the russian support from the air. are they doing anything else to help the syrian army? clarissa: well almost certainly they are involved in providing , various logistics, various help with intelligence. they have bases throughout the , thes you well know russians are not the most transparent when it comes to talking about the extent of their military intervention. what was interesting, after my speech at the u.n., when i had gone through all of the human rights abuses we have seen the , bombings of bakeries and schools and courthouses and hospitals, the one thing that russian of representative really seemed to take umbrage with was
my use of the word intervention. when it came to his turn to give a speech the only thing he say,zed upon, or i should why do you use this word intervention? this is not an illegal presence. we are there at the invitation know, of the government, of the country. i just found it so interesting that in the midst of all the things we are talking about, this came down to him to a question of semantics. charlie: i assume without the russian support for a side -- for assad, he would not survive. clarissa: many people will tell you that. of coarse, it is always difficult to predict these rings. we will say this. this time a year ago, before the russian assistance began the , regime was on the back foot. rebels appeared to have the momentum. everybody was whispering about,
for the end be denied -- and be nigh so to speak? we have had numerous occasions where people have thought that the fall of one side or the other was imminent. what is becoming more and more clear, charlie, is that that neither side can win a decisive victory. nowhere is that more pronounced than aleppo. because even if the seas is -- tomorrow,einforced one half is encircling the whole eastern half of aleppo you are , talking about potentially years to starve or bomb those 300,000 people out of eastern aleppo. so it is quite clear to anyone on the ground, the question of a notsive victory is simply on the cards. charlie: what is going to happen? clarissa: that is the question. charlie: you said they are going to continue to have a stalemate, and they continue to kill each other and more civilians are
victimized and more children are starving and all of the war and the hell that this is creating? clarissa: it is heartbreaking. it is absolutely heartbreaking. there are no winners on either side. there are no winners in aleppo. moment, whenever you have a situation mark each side thinks they have just enough of an advantage or just enough momentum going that they can win , a decisive military victory, then you take away all incentive essentially to bring both sides to the negotiating table. i don't believe that there can be any meaningful peace talks in syria while president bush are al assad -- president bashar -assad is in syria. i am basing this on conversations i have had with every single person either living in rebel held syria or who is supportive from outside of the country. the amount of blood that has been spilled, the amount of people who have been killed, the relentless bombardment the
, barrel bombs, the targeting of schools and hospitals, people do not feel they can move beyond that and ever accept bashar al-ssad to continue as their president. now, who on earth is in a position to make him or force him to stand down as president? certainly not america. possibly the russians, possibly the iranians, but what incentive do they have to do that at this stage? charlie: that is what the diplomats who wrote the letter. they need more leverage on the ground in order to bring the other side to the table. clarissa: exactly. and to be clear, the u.s. has no leverage in syria. the opinion of most syrian people is that the u.s. has essentially stood back and washed their hands of this conflict. the turning point was the so-called red line after the use of poisonous gas by assad by his
own people -- on his own people. the syrians understood there was no way the u.s. was going to step in and intervene on their behalf. that of course was then cemented when the u.s. decided to intervene and fight against isis. now, essentially, what leverage does the u.s. have? it doesn't really have any thing to gain. when it is sitting at the negotiating table saying to russia, hold on a you need to second, stop the bombardment of civilians, stop the barrel bombs, incendiary devices and cluster bombs that are being used, you don't have anything to back it up. there is no reason for the syrian regime or its proxies to pay any attention to what the u.s. is saying about this at all. charlie: the reason that the united states, according to the obama administration did not in fact uphold the promise about the red line in the syrians using gas was in fact the russians negotiated a deal to get most of the gas out of the country.
correct? clarissa: of course, that is the case. and now we have the u.s. is talking about potentially entering into some kind of a partnership with russia to target together the group that was the al qaeda affiliate on the ground in northern syria. though now they say they have severed that tie. there has been talk about essentially entering into an alliance with russia to target group.ecific in return from an affirmation or an agreement to stop the regime of assad from bombing civilian targets. i can't possibly say or comment on what that sort of relationship or partnership would actually look like on the ground, but i can certainly tell you based on conversations i have had with people who are on the ground, they think it would be disastrous. they think it would be a huge mistake. even though some of these more extremist factions are not
hugely popular with everyone living in rebel held areas, they are also the people who have unfortunately, charlie emerged , as the so-called heroes in this narrative. because they are the ones who have stepped in to fill the void not the international , community. the international community has been standing on the sidelines for years now wringing its , hands, while the people have been found with cluster bombs, -- been bombed with cluster bombs, barrel bombs. hitting schools and hospitals as we know. the reality is in rebel held syria, these islamist factions have emerged as an important force. now if the u.s. was to decide to join with russia to take out those more extremist factions, that was certainly be extremely unpopular with the syrian people that the u.s. would be trying to help. branding andn this changing its name, is this group
doing more than simply a surface image, or is there some significant change in what they might do in order for them to play some larger role when this comes down to parsing out what is going to be the future of syria? clarissa: i think charlie when you look at this move with the group calling themselves a new name, saying they have severed ties with al qaeda, this is not a change in ideology. this is a change in strategy. and if you watch the video where they made this announcement, the group's leader began by thanking current al qaeda leaders. he went on to quote osama bin laden. the group is definitely still islamicin the long-term of establishing some kind of government inside syria. at the same time, that doesn't mean this is not significant. because it is, and i think the group is trying to show several
key things by doing this move. firstly, they are trying to show essentially that they have put the needs of the syrian people above their own political agenda. they want to be seen as fostering unity between all the different rebel groups on the ground. they have learned from the stakes in the past that al qaeda made in iraq, and they understand that if you alienate the local populace, you will never be able to implement the kind of governance that they are looking to implement. they are trying to emesh themselves among the syrian public. they are trying to brand themselves as heroes in this narrative, and they are trying to do that by working very closely with other rebel held groups. they are trying to telegraph a message to the u.s. and the international community which not like us, we may not see eye-to-eye, but we are rational actors, and we have no interest in launching attacks beyond syria's borders. our focus right now is the syria project.
know whether or not this move really changes anything in terms of the group's larders significance, -- larger significance, one can say one thing. this is a move playing well on the ground in syria and playing well also with a lot of the allies of syria whether in turkey or qatar or saudi arabia. charlie: all the jihadist groups are sunni, are they not? our most of them? clarissa: they are. the sunni jihadist islamic one fromhether it is al qaeda or another, they have been so much of the rhetoric and the focus of a isis, i don't include them because they are operating in a separate art of the country and they did not have support of the syrian people or rebel groups. but it is important to remember there are extremist groups working very closely with assad. to name one of course hezbollah , which is designated a terrorist organization. iraqi militias
working with them, afghan militias as well, iranian forces. there are a whole number of extremists operating on both sides of this conflict. charlie: it is great to hear from you. and you so much joining us your appearance before the united nations security council. clarissa: thank you, thank you so much charlie.
charlie: "florence foster jenkins" is the new film from director stephen frears. meryl streep stars as a new york heiress and socialite whose terrible singing voice does not stop her from becoming an opera singer. the hollywood reporter recalls this as a warm hide it -- warmhearted film. here is the trailer. >> i am so excited. we are going to make a recording. ♪ >> it was wonderful, darling. >> want to try another take? >> i don't see why. it seemed perfect to me. when i was 16 years old, my father said if i didn't give up music, he would cut me off. of course he did not understand music is my life. ,>> 3000 people, they need drive they need music. >> you must go on. >> this is what we live for, isn't it? >> it is going very, very well.
>> bravo. charlie: i am pleased to have the stars of the film, meryl streep, hugh grant, and simon helberg. and director stephen frears at this table to talk about "florence foster jenkins." so describe her singing voice to me and how you re-create. stephen: she was famous as the worst singer ever to sing at carnegie hall. is she on youtube? yes, quite a lot of her arias. at the same -- so you start to laugh. at the same time she breaks your , heart, because she is so courageous. charlie: she wanted it so badly. stephen: yes, as she was a woman of such spirit and such will. she was terrific. charlie: but is that quality good the sense that she had, i went to do this and to hell with
the critics? stephen: that is what you americans do, isn't it? i am british. charlie: you said she was the perfect amateur? meryl: she was. i think she did, when she said music is my life, i think that was partly true and partly she , was animated by her love for bayfield. and his support in letting her follow her dreams and try her herself.xpress most lives are curtailed. she had plenty of money and plenty of support to make a fool of herself and also -- charlie: so this is a guy who is married to her has a mistress, does herelationship -- love her or is this simply opportunity? stephen: you are allowed to wonder. and i am glad you brought it up. because that is what we want the audience to ask themselves, at least for heart of the film, and
then we want them to gradually learn the truth, which was indeed the truth. which we now know empirically because we researched the characters. i read his diaries and read his letters. these two genuinely adored each other. the long 35 year marriage wasn't quite a marriage because they never actually remembered to get married, but there was massive love. albeit that it was a relationship with a very unorthodox, modern kind of shape. charlie: so they understood each other -- again, my argument makes the character to simons -- my character makes that argument is simon's character. he plays the piano for us, he is shocked to find what he thought was a happy marriage, in fact i was a have a mistress. i explained to him, we have an understanding. florence has another -- really it is more me convincing myself
than the actual -- meryl: i have an understanding that i am not going to understand it. not going to -- la la la la --not think about it. charlie: was it hard for you to learn to sing this? meryl: it was difficult to learn these extremely challenging arias. some of the most challenging arias -- charlie: they are challenging to sing well. you had to learn them badly. meryl: but not at first i had to first. learn them, and to learn them right. and it was really hard. [laughter] we,l: and then, you know, we were singing. simon was playing live in the film. so we were allowed to play with where we went off and where we failed. charlie: what is your character's role in this? simon: stephen?
charlie: didn't you get around to what the character's role is? stephen: i thought he knew. simon: my character's role is the accompanist. a kind of function -- charlie: a consciousness? simon: yeah the eyes of the , audience, i think. my eyes are featured bolding out of my head. pure wispting sort of of a man to what he thinks is his dream job. florence opens her mouth and birds fall out of the sky. he is looking around for help and nobody seems to understand , what the problem is. >> gentlemen, the chairs are not for practical use, you have been told. >> [indiscernible] >> that is me, sir. >> what should i play? >> i really don't mind as long as it is not too loud.
[the swan] ♪ >> that is lovely. [laughter] >> i must say, i think you are absolutely ideal. >> did i mention that i also compose? >> and he also composes. charlie: tell me more about how thatuld possibly be someone of florence's vocal skills could emerge, could emerge as a popular singer who has a chance to go to carnegie hall? meryl: well, you know, she
saying -- sang, she was a member of many, many, many clubs, which is aware women of means thrived at that time. they were not in the professions. they had no other thing to do except good works. so she found herself in new york with a lot of money from her father. she and her mother negotiated through society this way. found a place. gave lots of money away. and mostly to musical organizations. she just loved the music and basically really wanted to sing but she couldn't sing at all. , charlie: and she knew that. meryl: yes, and she launched little private concerts. s that she would give, but at a certain point at 76 years of age, she decided to make her debut which ended up being her farewell concert. bought the hall. charlie: this reminds me a
little bit -- you may know about this, it is gil kaplan who turned out to be a very good conductor. not universally viewed that. this guy had a magazine. he had come to new york, he had lived in new york, went to school at duke and then came back to new york. he had a magazine called "the institutional investor." he fell in love with mahler. and mahler's second resurrection sympathy -- symphony, fell in love with it, died maybe last year, fell in love with it. it meant more to him than anything he had ever heard. heard it at carnegie hall set out to become a conductor to conduct this one symphony, nothing else. and conducted in london with the london symphony and spent the rest of his life he would , occasionally play this. would pay for the hall and had
critics who said he did a good job, and he only knew that one symphony. some of the people who were conductors, who were music purists, said, this is not fair. this is not right. but there was a touch of florence in him. he did it well, just one symphony. meryl: but i am sure people recognize as i am sure they did , it in florence, it was equal parts bad singing but that aspirational zeal. , pureort of wonderful desire to share this thing she loved to wear elaborate , costumes, doolittle dances as the mood struck her. -- do little dances as the mood struck her. charlie: one of the most fun things you have done in a while. meryl: it was. i think it was the spirit of the woman and, it sort of you know,
, sort of a toxic cast over the world currently. and it is wonderful to encounter people who believe in love and art. these are the saving graces of civilization. charlie: and to be around the table. simon: when you said toxic cast -- charlie: the toxic cast of the conversation around the world. what made it fun was simply the fact you had a collaboration here about things that mattered. meryl: i made people laugh on the set. i can look around, the cameramen, all were going like this. charlie: she can make people laugh. she could have very well done comedy all her life. meryl: i don't know about that. charlie: she found the comedy in maggie thatcher. meryl: i do a mean donald trump. charlie: i heard about that, can you do it now? meryl: no i'm saving it for the
, inauguration. charlie: is this film about her ambition in the end, or is it about something else? meryl: her ambition, gosh. it doesn't feel, doing it, it didn't feel like ambition. it felt like an embrace. an embrace of the audience and of the people who she was sure wanted to hear this. and they did. and they did. so she wasn't wrong. but -- hugh: an unfortunate thing that happens or that happens in the film is that she makes a record while i am away. i have not got my eyes on her. i'm am with a girlfriend. she releases it to a radio station. and of course everyone goes mad for it because she is so funny. it is the funniest thing they
have ever heard. everyone wants a copy. poor old florence didn't understand. charlie: they were laughing at it rather than appreciating the music. meryl: -- hugh: that is why she decided to have a big concert at carnegie hall. charlie: but what is important it explains his relationship. , he was the enabler, the protector, all of that. hugh: he is the sort of machiavellian -- meryl: she protected him, too. he was not a very good actor. hugh: that is right. meryl: she had these high reviews. charlie: he had nowhere to go. meryl: she destroyed the bad reviews. she believed in him. i don't doubt he believed in her. i'm sure he had sort of a tin ear himself. whether -- charlie: about him. meryl: you had an eye for her but not any year. -- an ear. charlie: do the best actors you have worked with -- and you have worked with a bunch, they have
to come to some sort of real understanding of the character. meryl has found what she believes in, didn't believe in why she was the way she was. , you do that. that comes in part from the text where else? and from meryl: from the experience. i think you can get ready, you can get ready and learn the arias and learn everything else, but it is when you meet, and when we exchange you know, , desperation. and so the whole thing just , happens in here, in the air between us and nowhere else. director? eeds a the better actor you are, the theer you can do it on fourth as you would say in america. -- hoof as you would say it in america. i notice meryl doing a lot of that. charlie: i am with meryl streep. i am with meryl streep. i better be -- is that what you are saying?
hugh: yes, kind of. the more insecure and actor is, the more they have been prepared and they are liable to give , exactly the performance they have prepared in a bathroom year. if i have learned anything, meryl is right. do the prep but then try and wing it on the day. meryl: yeah, yeah. the other thing about acting, which i know nothing about the idea, do you want to , do it deliberately or just try to do it one more time? make it a little bit better, or do you view this as an opportunity to just -- meryl: i don't even think about it that way. charlie: how do you think about it? meryl: i just think of, you know, i don't know where he is going to throw the ball. i don't know her he was going to throw it every time. if you anticipate that, you are dead. the thing is dead. it is like a dead thing. charlie: you can't say dead without giving it something. simon: it is incredible. meryl: isn't that it? i mean, doing scenes with
meryl, it makes the life come out of you. hugh toohere is -- and -- i am not trying to -- hugh: no, no. i picked up the slum. -- slump. you did not do as many numbers with him. [laughter] stephen: directors are tragic figures. charlie: so what did you do then? what was your role? stephen: i went to my trailer. charlie: you went to your trailer? stephen: they were very, very good. charlie: when you have talented people. stephen: you shut up. no, of course you watch them. if they do something idiotic , i guess you say so, but they don't. know, i haves, you seen the movies i see how actors these screaming
monsters. here are three fine actors. monstrous ego tests, the lot of them, it is ensemble piece. [speaking simultaneously] stephen: some terrible person waiting to come out, but they play as an ensemble piece. meryl: he does, no seriously. often, they have monitors where the director watches what is going on even though it is right here. they look at the monitor. stephen listens often. sometimes -- didn't you notice that? he was he would be listening to , the scene. and that is where he found its truth or not. he would hear it, hear the truth in the -- stephen: john houston used to turn his back. he would literally turn his back so he could listen. billy wilder had a wonderful ear. alan bennie used to lay on the
floor. you can hear far more than you can see. hugh: that famous golf coach, we golfed together, famous golf coach, i can't november's name, mo something. -- i can't remember his name. mo something. he would say, you are slicing it, aren't you? he could make adjustments. charlie: you can hear a great shot. i mean, you can feel it, but it really sounds different. , it isin tennis too solid. charlie: what are you looking for? i mean, mike nichols, your great friend once said to me, i want , my actors to surprise me. i have said this before. i want them to do the same thing my architect will do, i want them to surprise me. i want my house to look like this and not be what it is i described. i wanted to be something that totally surprises me, and that is why i want to hire.
stephen: you don't know what you are looking for but when they do it, you will know. you go on and they do something and you say, that is right charlie: that is why you are a . charlie: that is why you are a director and they are not. meryl: yeah, i could not do that, what he does. charlie: why not? you have never thought about it for a second? meryl: i thought about it. but then i really think of the total job and i think no. , i like the subjective eye. i like defending my character, my turf. my person, my little quivering somebody. i don't want to think about everybody. [laughter] charlie: you are not slighted at all. she is thinking about you. "florence foster jenkins" opens in theaters on friday, august 12. thank you for joining us. see you next time. ♪
mark: you are watching bloomberg west. let us start with a check of your first word news. hillary clinton says donald trump spoke only of failure, poverty, and crime. today, at a manufacturing company in michigan, mrs. clinton said he has not offered any credible solutions to america's economic challenges. >> when it comes to creating jobs, i would argue it is not even close. even conservative experts say donald trump's agenda will pull our economy back into recession. mark: donald trump has added seven women to his economic advisory council. the council previously consisted of only men.